The AESA functionality allows the array to be spilt into a half dozen or more smaller virtual arrays, each operating independently. For example, instead of one beam scanning through a 120 degree x 120 degree sector, you have six virtual arrays scanning 60 degree by 40 degree sectors. Then you sum the six sectors.

These thin beams are working in conjunction with the ALR-94 too. Unless the enemy is flying EMCON, then the APG-77 will know where to look.

700 NM is better, but not that impressive either, as we are talking about a clean fighter with 8,3 tons of fuel!

Nic

It exceeds 700nm, with 5500lb combat load on internal fuel, and >900nm with EFTs.

You can question it all you want it’s good until you pretend that I said a Rafale would be better at it than a F35.

Anyway the Rafale is optimised to fly nap of the earth profiles at high speed with both a terrain following radar and an autonomous GPS/INS digital terrain following system. Combined with the impressive spectra EW suite, it should definately be enough to come in the range of the Scalp EG which is a stand-off stealthy cruise missile that is going to be used to dig a hole in the enemy IADS. All the while Spectra is going to provide ELINT/SIGINT for the next step.

Then 125 kg AASM (125kg for added standoff range) are going to be used for DEAD to eliminate the rest of the enemy air defense from stand off range. Those could be targeted by spectra directly or by information from other Rafale’s spetra’s singint/elint capabilities.

Nic

Flying nap of the earth, means that you have much less situational awareness though, especially if you’re looking for moving targets.

It could carry a billion tons for all I care, what counts is the combat radius at a similar payload.

F-35A：600 NM／1,100 km （AIM-120*2 + 2,000 Ib JDAM*2） as per toan’s figures is definately nothing spectacular for a plane that flies “clean” and that carries that much fuel! The fuel costs alone for any F35 user are going to be huge, especially when we consider 98% of the flights are going to be peacetime but operators are going to pay for that drag anyway while other aircrafts could do training missions with say 1 supersonic belly tank.

Nic

600nm was KPP. The F-35 exceeds this figure by >100nm.

yet irrelevant when judging performance of fighters that entered service over 30 years later, except if these fighters do worse, of course

No, a combat loaded F-35 compares with a clean fighter, was the point being made.

A F35 can’t even carry internally the loadout that the Rafale carry in Afghanistan!

Nic

For Afghanistan, an F-35 wouldn’t have to limit itself to an internal load. What kind of load can the Rafale carry on the first day of war, when penetrating airspace protected by S-300/400s. Oh wait, it can’t penetrate that airspace.:D

What average RCS? What exactly should that be?

All those supernatural figures given for F-35, F-22, B-2 etc. given here are provided as frontal aspect RCS, I don’t remember having seen any frontal average RCS claims. Before we make comparison, we should at least make sure we compare comparable.

BTW, would you be so kind as to post some link leading to that document? I would like to read it, maybe there is some explanation to that.

Are you being purposefully difficult? Whenever you see RCS figures listed, it’s gonna be the frontal aspect. If you tried to provide figures for every conceivable aspect, it’d be a pretty cumbersome list. The point of the matter is that when an aircraft is inbound, the aspect that the enemy will see is the front, till the aircraft is over the their territory.

Each T/R module sends a ping at a certain frequency… at what amplitude?

As I said before, power is a function of the amplitude squared (at a given frequency).

No power = no range.

That is a fundamental issue you have yet to explain the solution to.

[Of course, there are ways and means, but you have yet to explain them – then you have to explain how you hide the characteristics of the solutions to limited power from a modern RWR]

It’s already been explained to the extent it can be without going into classified techniques. Rapid change of freqs and PRF waveforms(and multitudes of simultaneous beams with all of these characteristics), very narrow beams(i.e. 2 degrees by 2 degrees or less), lower power, etc…